Thanks for all the comments on my post about character creation process! As always it is good to get your input and experiences, even if I end up taking a different approach.
One thing I was a little surprised by is with the strong reaction against the idea of cult being analogous to class in D&D. Now to me, the answer is – of course it is! The Gloranthan gods are archetypes, each cult incentives the character to be more like the archetype. And of course D&D classes are archetypes.
Same thing with clans in Vampire (which of course were heavily influenced by Cults of Prax and Cults of Terror).
And of course we do this in video games. In a few games we have open progression in a broad range of ability trees (e.g., Skyrim or Cyberpunk 2077), and there are ways that you could map cult atop that (say you have a bunch of ability trees, and cult gives bonus for one and opens up a special cult ability tree). But even then choosing your cult would likely be a key decision that impacts almost every other decision you make.
Now it is certainly possible to play a “pre-cult” character and have them play through early adulthood and choose a cult after a session or more of play. And with the right players and GM that can be awesome fun.
But I don’t think that it should be the default approach to getting people playing RQ. Cult should be one of the first decisions you make in character generation, and likely even before determining characteristics and the rest.
And of course, cults are ANALOGOUS to classes, not the same.
Now my focus on this is thinking about the process of character creation. In RQG, cult is chosen nearly last, which I increasingly think runs against the user experience.
